Wikipedia:Featured list candidates/List of Hot 100 number-one singles of 2002 (U.S.)/archive1
Tools
Actions
General
Print/export
In other projects
Appearance
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
- The following is an archived discussion of a featured list nomination. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the article's talk page or in Wikipedia talk:Featured list candidates. No further edits should be made to this page.
The list was promoted by Matthewedwards 06:56, 3 March 2009 [1].
Toolbox |
---|
I am nominating this for featured list because it has been peer reviewed and I feel it meets the criteria. Thanks, Efe (talk) 02:48, 17 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Resolved comments from Truco
|
---|
|
- Support -- Previous issues resolved to meet WP:WIAFL standards.--₮RUCӨ 17:33, 2 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Support, all issues resolved. Dabomb87 (talk) 02:21, 2 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Resolved issues, Dabomb87 (talk) |
---|
Comments from Dabomb87 (talk · contribs)
|
Sources look good. Dabomb87 (talk) 01:34, 22 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Comments
- Although nine singles reached number one in 52 issues of the magazine in the calendar year, two of which began their peak position in 2001, and are thus excluded. is not a proper sentence. The bit inbetween the commas act as if its in parentheses, so without that part, the sentence is "Although nine singles reached number one in 52 issues of the magazine in the calendar year and are thus excluded." which doesn't make any sense.
- Removed the last comma. The first one is grammatical. --Efe (talk) 00:44, 2 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- The Billboard Hot 100 is a chart that... →→ The Billboard Hot 100 is a record chart that...
- I think the word record is carried out in this phrase "the best-performing singles". --Efe (talk) 09:49, 2 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- 2002 is an Easter egg. Try to use the full titled link instead
- Its rather awkward. --Efe (talk) 00:44, 2 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- May it be worth linking to calendar year?
- I think that "calendar" is redundant. Dabomb87 (talk) 14:09, 1 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- then-member reads awful
- Is it grammatically amiss? --Efe (talk) 00:44, 2 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- "number one" vs "number-one": Be consistent (I think the latter is more correct)
- No, "number one" is the noun version (so-and-so reached number one) but "number-one" is used as a compound adjective (she achieved a number-one single for the second time that year). Dabomb87 (talk) 14:03, 1 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Most of the number-one singles in 2002 were extended chart-toppers. what does this mean? The songs are 5-minutes long?
- extended chart-topper'. I think its clear. --Efe (talk) 00:44, 2 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Same with "Lose Yourself" is the longest-running single
- Its clear. I think music articles are just too different from other articles here WP. That phrasing is widely used. --Efe (talk) 00:44, 2 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- "Hot in Herre" and "Ain't It Funny" by Jennifer Lopez →→ "Ain't It Funny" by Jennifer Lopez and "Hot in Herre"
- Fixed because its ambiguous. --Efe (talk) 00:44, 2 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Is "Lose Yourself" part of the "Rock era"? It's a rap song
- Its regardless of the genre of the song. Rock era began in 1955 up to now. --Efe (talk) 00:44, 2 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Table entries are verified and correct.
Matthewedwards (talk • contribs • email) 07:14, 1 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page.
Hidden category: